this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
495 points (98.4% liked)

World News

39364 readers
3239 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Grocery prices are expected to rise globally as soil degradation, driven by overfarming, deforestation, and climate change, reduces farmland productivity.

The UN estimates 33% of the world’s soils are degraded, with 90% at risk by 2050. Poor soil forces farmers to use costly fertilizers or abandon fields, raising prices for staples like bread, vegetables, and meat.

Experts advocate for sustainable practices like regenerative agriculture, cover cropping, and reduced tillage to restore soil health.

Innovations and government subsidies could mitigate impacts, but immediate action is critical to ensure food security.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Well you can also turn that around and ask: why do we need more people? What does another individual add?

One might argue that a baby born today might cure cancer or all known diseases. They might invent free, unlimited energy. They could be the greatest writer to ever live. Humanity’s best poet. He could bring about world peace.

But he could also be our next Hitler, Saddam Hussein, etc.

Earth is a finite planet. It’s not getting any bigger. So every human we add to it, takes up yet another square meter that consumes resources for an average of 80 years or so. I’ve seen my country get more crowded and the problems it causes.

We don’t need more people. At all.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Be the change you want to see in the world then, and leave it. After all, what do you add? Why even comment here? Do we need more people with more opinions?

I don’t mean any of that. I just say it aloud to show how petty and shitty it is. Of course if people are just numbers on a tablet then you don’t give a shit if it’s 2 billion or 3 billion. But I would hazard to guess that if you got out more, travelled more, talked to more people, saw where they lived, sang for their childrens’ birthdays and spoke at their funerals, held their hands in the ER, that you would appreciate the fact that everyone does add something. And that although there is no shortage of cruelty and stupidity in our world, it is also overflowing with love and ingenuity.

I think it’s beautiful. And I don’t presume to know what the “right” number of people is to make a world. Frankly I find that talk disturbing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You can absolutely mean those things. I’ve said them to others, so they don’t offend me.

I agree that everyone’s a unique individual. But when looking at problems on a global scale, you need to approach things objectively and dispassionately.

From a purely statistics standpoint, I and 1 sibling should be here. Because that’s the replacement rate for when my parents die. A life for a life, so to speak.

Problem is, my parents had three kids. So now we’ve already gone above that replacement rate. And globally, more people have kids above the replacement rate, hence the population growth.

I don’t have or want kids. That’s not for me, and I don’t want them to be born in a world that’s going to get rapidly worse to live in. Unfortunately, not everyone is willing or capable to make such choices.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

I’ll point out the way you said that you and 1 of your siblings should be here. Only two, but it definitely includes you. Because you are special. See, everyone thinks this. You can say you meant any 2 of you, but those weren’t the words you chose.

Saying the world has too many people is like saying there’s too damn much traffic. You are the traffic. But everyone always grants himself special status, because they are the main character in their story.

Don’t go too hard on your parents for having 3 kids. As you yourself said, you have to look at things at a global scale. And since some people won’t have any kids, and some kids will die, it’s perfectly fine for many couples to have three children, even in a society on track for mere replacement.

Anyway griping about being over the replacement rate is increasingly irrelevant as developing societies are all dropping below it. There’s a very strong correlation between a society developing and their birth rate slowing, and demographers have done the math to arrive at a probable max of 12 billion. There’s no grounded argument that this number of people can’t be supported sustainably with current technology, and no other argument for their superfluity, except misanthropy. Which, if you’ve sincerely told people to kill themselves, you definitely suffer from. Anyway enjoy that unique, and apparently very sunny life you think you probably shouldn’t be living.